Very interesting. I wonder whether the sinking ground water levels could be stabilized in the coming years by the increasing vegetation being able to hold and absorb more water in the landscape. I believe river ecosystems to be very very valuable and maybe some other adaption measures in the surrounding landscapes could help reduce the need for this reservoir. I personally do not think that nuclear should be invested in as a path for the future although it is probably sensible that existing plants should be kept running. My dream for Ukraine would be that it is helped by Europe to rebuilt in a resilient future proof way taking into account all the possible risks be it in conjunction of the climate/biodiversity crisis as well as geopolitical ones. If it is absolutely needed to be able to feed Ukraine and to get it back on its feet this should be a priority but it is so very important to not built back in the conventional way.

Maybe eventually they should build several smaller dams instead of one big one, just enough for irrigation and water supply, considering the potential ecological balance of the whole region, rather than of just a narrow potential ‘reserve’.
It’s naturally a dry area, the south bank opposite Kherson is already almost a ‘desert’ with dunes, although with a long history - they say such ‘Pontic Steppe’ grasslands were where indo-european tribes originated.
Anyway, before grand plans, Ukraine has to control both sides of the river, so I suppose they’ll keep watching how hard the mud bakes this summer.